Read the full judgment text of HCCT81/1999 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 4 July 2000 before Hon Burrell J in Chambers.
Construction law — Performance bond — On-demand vs conditional bond — Summary judgment — Insurance company as surety — Large scale infrastructure project. The plaintiff claimed payment under a performance bond issued by the defendant insurer for works done by a subcontractor on the Chep Lap Kok airport project. The principal issues were whether the bond was on-demand or conditional and whether the defendant had raised triable issues to resist summary judgment. The court found the bond was an on-demand bond, using textual analysis and commercial context, aligning it with the Esal (Commodities) Ltd precedent. Defences were found to be insufficiently substantiated and largely speculative despite late amendments. While courts must be cautious to refuse defendants a chance to defend, the defence was 'shadowy' and summary judgment was appropriate. Judgment was entered for the plaintiff for the bonded sum plus interest and costs. The defendant later appealed successfully to the Court of Appeal (CACV000281/2000).
Legal issues: Status of the Bond · Existence of triable issues raised by the Defence
Outcome: Summary judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff for the bonded sum, plus interest at prime plus 1%, plus costs.
Cited by 1 case · Cites 1 case